Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think!mintaka!mit-eddie!attctc!davidg
From: davidg@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (David Guntner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: GOMF and CPU hogging
Message-ID: <11335@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Date: 6 Feb 90 23:28:29 GMT
References: <1990Feb6.144743.28176@aucs.uucp>
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 16

From article <1990Feb6.144743.28176@aucs.uucp>, by 880274d@aucs.uucp (Ralph Doncaster):
> I've seen GOMF 2.2 and noticed that it takes up a considerable amount of CPU
> time (according to Xoper).  
> Does anyone know if 3.0 is as bad?

Actually, from what I've observed, GOMF is simply sucking up a lot of free
CPU resources.  I've noticed when running XOPER to monitor CPU activity, and
have started some other task, that GOMF's CPU percentage will go down to
accomidate (sp?) the new task.
                 --Dave

-- 
        David Guntner  UUCP: {ames, mit-eddie}!attctc!davidg
                       INET: davidg@attctc.Dallas.TX.US  (killer)
"...New ship, but she's got the right name. ...Treat     --Admiral L. McCoy
 her like a lady, and she'll always bring you home."   "Encounter at Farpoint"